[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-1-en-105":3,"doc-seo-176808-105":53,"doc-detail-176808-en":127},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,14,19,24,29,34,39,44,49],{"id":8,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":11,"show_sort_weight":12,"slug":13},11,1,"Template","Presentations",90,"presentations",{"id":15,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":16,"show_sort_weight":17,"slug":18},12,"Resumes",80,"resumes",{"id":20,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":21,"show_sort_weight":22,"slug":23},14,"Invoices",70,"invoices",{"id":25,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":26,"show_sort_weight":27,"slug":28},15,"Posters",60,"posters",{"id":30,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":31,"show_sort_weight":32,"slug":33},16,"Social Media",50,"social-media",{"id":35,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":36,"show_sort_weight":37,"slug":38},17,"Forms",40,"forms",{"id":40,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":41,"show_sort_weight":42,"slug":43},18,"Letters",30,"letters",{"id":45,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":46,"show_sort_weight":47,"slug":48},21,"Paper Templates",5,"papers-templates",{"id":50,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":51,"show_sort_weight":4,"slug":52},158,"General","general-158",{"code":4,"msg":54,"data":55},"ok",{"site_id":56,"language":57,"slug":58,"title":59,"keywords":60,"description":61,"schema_data":62,"social_meta":120,"head_meta":122,"extra_data":124,"updated_unix":126},105,"en","budget-committee-262023-meeting-notes-structural-equity-team-recommendations","Budget committee - 2/6/2023 Meeting Notes - Structural Equity Team Recommendations","","Budget committee meeting notes outline Structural Equity Team recommendations to improve accessible information and rubrics throughout the budget process. The discussion covers opportunities for involvement, step-by-step methods to prompt better accessible guidance, and a proposal call with clear criteria aligned to the strategic plan. Participants debate division-by-division communication, a structured vetting and timeline, continuous stakeholder engagement, and how to compile and provide feedback on proposal abstracts and decision package viability.",{"@graph":63,"@context":119},[64,80,102],{"@type":65,"itemListElement":66},"BreadcrumbList",[67,71,74,77],{"item":68,"name":69,"@type":70,"position":9},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":72,"name":10,"@type":70,"position":73},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/",2,{"item":75,"name":11,"@type":70,"position":76},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/presentations/",3,{"item":78,"name":59,"@type":70,"position":79},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/budget-committee-262023-meeting-notes-structural-equity-team-recommendations/176808/",4,{"url":78,"name":59,"@type":81,"image":82,"author":87,"headline":59,"publisher":90,"fileFormat":93,"inLanguage":57,"description":61,"dateModified":94,"datePublished":95,"encodingFormat":93,"isAccessibleForFree":96,"interactionStatistic":97},"DigitalDocument",{"url":83,"@type":84,"width":85,"height":86},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/budget-committee-262023-meeting-notes-structural-equity-team-recommendations/176808.png","ImageObject",442,249,{"name":88,"@type":89},"Nguyễn Văn Học","Person",{"url":68,"name":91,"@type":92},"DocShare","Organization","application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document","2026-10-19","2026-09-02",true,{"@type":98,"interactionType":99,"userInteractionCount":101},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":100},"ViewAction",10,{"@type":103,"mainEntity":104},"FAQPage",[105,111,115],{"name":106,"@type":107,"acceptedAnswer":108},"What is the Structural Equity Team focusing on for the budget process?","Question",{"text":109,"@type":110},"The team emphasizes accessible information and rubrics across every step, plus clearer opportunities for involvement throughout the process.","Answer",{"name":112,"@type":107,"acceptedAnswer":113},"How should the proposal call and vetting process be structured?",{"text":114,"@type":110},"Participants discuss using division-level structure and inflection-point conversations, with vetting occurring across department, dean, and VP levels rather than an unstructured open submission flow.",{"name":116,"@type":107,"acceptedAnswer":117},"What information should be included in a proposal abstract submission?",{"text":118,"@type":110},"The group references a template and highlights key items such as what/why, expected outcomes, estimated employees or dollar amount, space or facilities needs, collaborators, and a capital-related component where applicable.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":78,"og:type":121,"og:title":59,"og:site_name":91,"og:description":61},"article",{"robots":123,"canonical":78},"index,follow",{"doc_id":125,"site_id":56},176808,1791720751,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":128},{"doc_id":125,"user_id":129,"nickname":88,"user_avatar":130,"doc_module":9,"category_id":8,"category_name":11,"doc_title":59,"doc_description":61,"doc_content":131,"file_id":132,"file_url":133,"file_type":134,"file_size":135,"view_count":101,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":9,"is_downloadable":9,"audit_status":9,"page_count":136,"language":137,"language_code":57,"site_id":56,"html_lang":57,"table_of_contents":138,"faqs":139,"seo_title":140,"seo_description":61,"update_tm":141,"read_time":76},1374402739827,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/14000c97e7351f1a627?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1787885694763230660","Budget committee 2/6/2023\nLinda Beckman, Allison Giffen, Shawna Gilbrand, Faye Gallant, Bernie Housen, Ted Castro, Josef Morgensten, Becca Kenna Schenk, Rahma Iqbal, in person: Brad Johnson, Melinda Assink, Ichi Kwon, Joyce Lopes, Kim Ayer, Bow Jerns, Brian Ross, Jacqueline Hughes, Max Bronsema, Paqui Paredes\n* Structural Equity Team Recommendations\nFocus: Accessible INformation and Rubrics throughout the process\nOpportunties for involvement\nUsing rubrics or tools to help developers and decision makers\napplied to all budget process\nMethods: Step by step, ask selves at each step what would improve accessible information or rubrics?\nCall for proposals for focus areas and criteria\n* alignment with strategic plan\n* collaboration, how it connects to outcomes\nideas/comments:\nBH - hard to find website information for Budget\nPP: not many people go to the budget forums - helpful to channel call for proposals through each division (provost to deans to department chairs)\nuse the flow of information for this process - call people's attention in a way that is better than just 'going to the budget website\nBJ: some structure for how it is going to work. not just an open free for all to submit a proposal - some process in your division ahead of time to set structure\nJL: communication in each division from VP - by some date collectively agree we get this info and process out - this isn't you all send them in, we need to coordinate efforts\nPP: there needs to be a vetting process at department, dean, vp - inflection points and conversation that needs to happen\nBJerns: Redefining expectations\nBH: Rubrics: should have clear timeline for the different steps\nMB: timeline - I do my abstracts when faculty aren't around\nBJ: May - pulling together things from that academic year. what stayed an abstract. that will help. not one brand new process every year, but something continuing from last year\nIK: proposal tracker website - Kim created, what wasn't approved, what was...\nMB: can connect and maintain.\nAG: are we asking writers to say what is internal/external funding\nFG: no we are not asking proposers to do that. Linda's area - because they have auxillary and fee supported. Different relationship with funding source.\nAG: Faculty proposals are smaller?\nFG: No not always. Child development center - fees and rates, federal funding, state subsidies, lots of channels. if we have some channels, how do you know if they are in the process. Clarifying channels up front\nLB: takes funding from other areas. for trying to think about all of the pieces.\nSG: Rolling communiucations thorughout the year - in CHAT\nDivisional Strategic planning\nalign with? areas to strengthen? included to think about budget iceberg as a whole and not just incremental pieces\nAccessible info:\nJL: if divisions have specific strategic plans that support the university wide strategic plan, could be shared ahead of time. helpful in informing across division and synergies\nBJ: good thought to idenfity some internal strategic needs beyond internal capability. year over year thing. Programmatic things, go over ideas without the worry that i need something new or a decision package to do something new with it. explicitly a part of it\nRubrics:\nBJerns: after a few years, ability to assess\nProposal Abstract Submission\nis that process clear? not clear, strengthened?\nAccessible:\nJL: division by division explain the processes, less likely to get suprises abstracts.\nPP: instead of all abstracts going to be routed through the deans for AA division\nJH: are we intending them to submit, what info do we want in an abstract?\nBJ: there is a template\nJL: we collected these in october - high level. is there enough interest to put a proposal out\nFG: basics, what is it, who is developing, which area, description what/why, outcome expectation, estimated number of employees or dollar amount, space or facilities, who is collaboarting or involved with it\nBJ: as we fold capital and operating into one process. we should ha","cbCaiplv7i7QD8fW","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiplv7i7QD8fW","docx",28848,9,"English","# Structural Equity Team Recommendations\n## Focus and Methods\n## Call for Proposals and Alignment\n## Accessible Information and Division Communication\n## Rubrics and Timelines\n## Proposal Abstract Submission and Feedback","[{\"question\":\"What is the Structural Equity Team focusing on for the budget process?\",\"answer\":\"The team emphasizes accessible information and rubrics across every step, plus clearer opportunities for involvement throughout the process.\"},{\"question\":\"How should the proposal call and vetting process be structured?\",\"answer\":\"Participants discuss using division-level structure and inflection-point conversations, with vetting occurring across department, dean, and VP levels rather than an unstructured open submission flow.\"},{\"question\":\"What information should be included in a proposal abstract submission?\",\"answer\":\"The group references a template and highlights key items such as what/why, expected outcomes, estimated employees or dollar amount, space or facilities needs, collaborators, and a capital-related component where applicable.\"}]","Budget committee - 2/6/2023 Meeting Notes - Structural Equity Team Recommendations | DOCX",1788325649]